About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
to be in charge the coverage was there. i am not sure a lot of that registered in washington intelligence community where we had a different sense of the soviet leadership we were acquiring as we went through the dialogue it became difficult to look what we were getting from the intelligence side and what we received across the table but in geneva as president reagan met gorbachev the first time the two of them met in front of a fireplace conversation later walking along the lake and began to see the emergence where people accept and believe in president reagan's view of the role of nuclear weapons, very real distasteful. the key documents that emerged from geneva besides agreements later, the key document, the joint statement at the beginning, two leaders agree nuclear war can never be won and must never be fought. there were negotiations going on at the time, negotiations going on in geneva but they began to take their lead from the summit discussions. we were not able easily to get to the washington summit. kept running into bilateral issues in which one of our correspondents was picke
in washington, d.c. however, the proximity of the south caucasus to iran as well as strong relationship with armenia, azerbaijan and georgia. have with both of the united states and israel, it increases the appeal of the iranians for targeting those countries. i applaud those governments in the region for the vigilance against the iranian threat. however, i'm particularly concerned about the security at the u.s. embassy as the agent location of the facility leave our people there particularly vulnerable. i often find myself comparing the geopolitics of the south caucasus to accordion not. a tangle of current events of these countries in the region isolated from their neighbors. unfortunately, such isolation can blame to the hands of hours laying on the periphery of the region. press reports and conversations i had while i was in the region indicate that iran is taking or at least has the potential to take advantage of armenians regional isolation and thus the country's economic dependence on their common border to use armenian banks and enterprises to skirt international sanctions. the
] >> welcome again to the foundation for defense of democracy's annual washington forum. my name is kenneth schwartz. i have the pleasure of introducing distinguished public official robert kc, senior senator from the state of pennsylvania. you served since 2007 as chairman of near east and south asia subcommittee, senate foreign relations committee only in the first term. one can scarcely imagine a more challenging time, the past two years in the middle east have seen wars in international borders, collapse of regimes in decades and the rise of political movements that may yet turn hostile in the united states and its allies. new developments, he has led the way on many issues of great concern to ftd. he is founder and co-chair of the bipartisan senate caucus on weapons of mass destruction, terrorism, in that capacity worked across the partisan divide to highlight serious threats of -- weapons of mass deliberation. he has done as much to run our greatest threat in the middle east and often lead the way on pressure advancing nuclear activities and efforts to destabilize the middle east. in
never get the "washington post" to print this point, but robert byrd when he was majority leader exercise the nuclear option four times. it goes back to the beginning of the senate whereby you set binding precedent in the senate by simple majority rules. furthermore, it was being used admittedly extraordinary, one that i think out to be used in very rare occasion, only for extenuating circumstances was done not to up in the tradition but to restore it. prior to 2003 derrick never been a judge, avril edition nominee denied confirmation deeply filibuster. never, never, never never. beginning with -- i think ultimately five judges who have the majority support, push judges who were all denied confirmation deeply filibuster though they had majority support. prior to that it'd never happen. so we are trying to restore the what it always been. you can argue that ought to be a majority. that had not been the standard pride 2003. on your question of time, you're right. biggest vulnerability is time. everything takes so long. i remember when it came to the house and i came over to the sen
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4